When vitally important decisions are being made, we believe it is incumbent on councillors to proffer statements that are accurate. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, but espousing unfounded views and presenting them as ‘facts’ is unacceptable. Even if ignorance is partly to blame for such announcements, it does not absolve councillors from their duty of proper oversight. Their role is to analyse, question, and provide a rationale that will stand up to full scrutiny. This has not been done – especially at the last council meeting.
Two important items were presented at the last council meeting – the draft Housing Strategy and the Caulfield Station Structure Plan. Both items have the potential to dramatically change residential amenity and the environment in Glen Eira and thus affect every resident.
In regard to the Caulfield Structure Plan the draft proposes one height of 25 storeys, and for the MRC freehold land 12 storeys. All heights are discretionary rather than mandatory which of course means that they could ultimately be higher! No urban design evidence, nor overshadowing impacts were provided for this item. Even in the heritage precinct of Derby Road, the proposal is for a discretionary 8 storey limit. This of course begs the question as to why other heritage commercial zones in Bentleigh, Elsternwick and Carnegie were allocated a mandatory four storey height limit. Are we to assume that some areas are more ‘heritage worthy’ than others?
We take particular issue with some of the comments made by Athanasopolous and Zyngier as outlined below:
ATHANASOPOLOUS: on the issue of heights in commercial areas this councillor argued that Glen Eira has little chance of achieving mandatory controls in commercially zoned land and certainly not in areas zoned Activity Centre Zone. Conclusion? – that discretionary heights are better than nothing – thus absolving council for even trying! He went on to challenge anyone to come up with ‘evidence’ that this was not the case when he stated that people: Can’t come up with where mandatory controls have been given for 12 storeys in an activity centre structure plan. People can’t even provide that evidence.
ZYNGIER: basically reiterated this line of argument and said that council has no control over commercial zones.
Both statements are factually incorrect! Other councils have been successful in acquiring mandatory height limits for their commercial strips and are nowhere near 25 storeys as proposed in this draft structure plan. Whilst it is true that ultimately the Minister must sign off on such amendments, the primary question should be: WHY HAVE THESE OTHER COUNCILS BEEN SUCCESSFUL? Clearly councils do have ‘control’ over what they propose and what they pursue or are willing to accept. In Glen Eira, we start from the proposition that worse could be imposed so let’s go for 25 storeys as a starter!
We have taken the time and trouble to go through gazetted amendments from other councils which have all had mandatory height controls enacted in their precincts. All of these are well within the 10 year limit that Athanasopolous asked for. They even include some Activity Centre Zones, where none of the heights come close to what Glen Eira is asking for.
Please consider the following table carefully and then reflect on Glen Eira’s approach and the validity of what some councillors espouse.
Glen Eira Debates 
February 28, 2022 at 12:33 PM
Fascinating. Issue is how much bullshit answers councillors are prepared to accept from this administration and how well they query, or even read what’s put in front of them. I suspect that very few councillors go beyond the officers reports.Easy then to trot out the same bullshit.
February 28, 2022 at 12:53 PM
Thank you, this is again a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate about how we are governed and how most of our institutions are failing us in the area of planning. Cr Athanasopoulos does have form when it comes to failing to research issues or get his facts straight–the impression he gives is that he knows the outcome he wants and is prepared to say anything in support of it. Don’t say if an apartment development complies with all relevant standards unless it has been assessed against the apartment development standards.
When the Minister rejected Council’s C184, he stated: “Additional built form analysis is required to justify mandatory height limits. Mandatory heights will only be supported if there is sufficient development potential in and around the activity centres to meet future housing and commercial development needs.”. If Cr Athanasopoulos thinks there is negligible chance of getting mandatory height limits then that means Council hasn’t done the necessary strategic work. Why hasn’t Council done the necessary strategic work?
The Minister is dreadful, and anybody with an analytical mind would be seeking clarification on all the ambiguities in his letter. However we have seen NOTHING published, no meeting notes, no further correspondence, no evidence of who is demanding what and why. If councillors aren’t up to the job they should resign. If you’re aligned with the Labor party and as a result are unwilling to speak up when their hubris leads to poor policy I doubt you can function as an effective councillor. Imaging trying to strike a secret deal with a subsection of the development industry in which both parties share in windfall profits generated from rezoning and removal/reduction of amenity standards, and expect us to go along with such blatant corruption of the planning system.
Anyway, now that you’ve come up with evidence that directly contradicts what a councillor said at a council meeting, I wonder if he will apologise or at least outline what research he did before making that statement.
February 28, 2022 at 1:39 PM
Reckon you’re dead right. This mob don’t do the necessary strategic work. It’s either beyond them or they sit and cower before government and want heaps more dwellings so their coffers are full.
February 28, 2022 at 12:57 PM
It to easy for councillors to parrot the bureaucrats speak. It saves them having to think, let alone act. Apart from this, I blame it largely on decades of Liberal Partly dominance across the GE region. The Libs are pro development extremists and Glen Eira has been a dumping ground for their developers mates since the 1960’s. If you want a change, change both major parties.
February 28, 2022 at 1:05 PM
If I remember correctly didn’t Magee say several times that discretionary heights are useless and he is in favour of mandatory? Was pretty quiet I gather on this last meeting.
February 28, 2022 at 3:04 PM
The bottom line in all of this is the culture of a council. Planners are planners. They get the same degrees and qualifications. How they implement these skills and decide on what’s appropriate boils down to the culture of the place. If the powers that be think 25 stories is ok, then that’s what will happen. This place has had decades of lousy planning and is now behind the eight ball in getting on top of things. Councillors jobs should be devoted 100% to changing the culture and getting in line with some of these other councils that do give a stuff about protecting their ratepayers. I was glad to hear that four councillors are on this track.